Zompist Bboard Again

Could anyone help guide me starting to translate this from the Count of Years (part 2) into Verdurian?

Bärumemaniciú vežane tra soán etaldán;
Irlädne tra soem siirem cimem;
Zet puyne potece sa silvem.
Bérunor ilun fue etama hipřaner.
Ircrusne er, ridec, trožne
Soi nahisi, Iliažë er Iliacás.
Lelne dy dascoi siča zovcu ne nagen lië,
Dy andorî gurî er ursî siča yažnu,
Veni er šuali otál ruřom dy surin,
Pavaši lapisi, prosice tro pavi lelen.

Bārumemaniciū ran across the plains;
he clambered over the rolling hills;
he waded knee-deep through forests.
Lake Bérunor was a pool for him to bathe in.
He reached up and, laughing, touched
the moons, Xlainari and Têllênari.
He watched animals playing at his feet,
mighty lions and bears hunting,
deer and horses swift as mice,
tiny rabbits, almost too small to see.

I wasn't sure what to do with "knee-deep", "a pool for him to bathe in", or the transformations in the second half. Just going for literal, for now. It's probably bad (I'm just starting), but I'd be grateful for pointers!

Very good work!

I think I'd use the accusative for the appositive— thus "Iliažä er Iliacás"— but it would be correct either way.

The one thing I would change is "Lelne dy dascoi..." which sounds wrong to me. I had to re-read the grammar and I see where you got this. But I'd use a relative clause: "Lelne dascom kaë zovcu..."

For the "knee-deep" line I'd try something like "Soî silvî attrounu soin yoloin." (lit., the forests reached his knees).

Sorry, one more thing: I'd write Bärumemaníciu— the Verdurians would not try to represent the long u.

Oops, I also noticed a bit of corruption in my text— bārumemaniciū is 'giants'; the poem should either have Bārumemaniciu ('the giant') or use his name, Mavordaguendu.

Brilliant - thank you!

Next I decided to try something a little bit more poetic.
How it wailed, the ktuvok! How angrily it thrashed,
like a horse shaking a rider, like the sea tossing a ship.
Lerīmanio, implacable, held the sword-hilt.
Cursing, screaming, the ktuvok wished
to reach and rend him with its terrible claws.
But like a man taming a horse, he held tight;
like a captain who knows storms and seas
he kept his head. He twisted his sword
in the creature's heart, till it died and was still.

http://www.zompist.com/ciroma8.htm

I think it is pretty bad alliterative verse according to the rules on the Verdurian poetics page, and I don't think it entirely counts as sulirulî either(?), and in trying to get it to alliterate I mashed up the meaning (I ended up using "he maintained the glue" for "he kept his head"...)... but it's an attempt, anyway.

The syntax in line 1b is supposed to allow 'kiel' to be the primary stress (to more happily alliterate with iskrične), and in not exactly repeating the pattern of the first half-line, to have the impact of a broken pattern. But it may just be wrong. Most later lines I stopped caring so much about which stresses were alliterating, and indeed whether it was really the stresses that were alliterating at all. I used relative clauses rather than dy or participles, but not sure the use of participles in line 4 is legal anyway.

Still, it was fun; any pointers welcome!


Edit: Maybe instead of glitoš: ges (power), gués (power, might), or my possibly-too-concrete favourite, grom (thunder, root of gromnát 'threat, menace'). He kept fresh his thunder seems fun after "like a captain who knows storms".

(I can see why Verdurians need that alliteration dictionary after all this. There could be any number of good words with g- before the stress, but not at the beginning of the word.)

Second edit: I've cleaned it up to the point that it mostly does do the right things metrically, I think (except line two; I can't find any alliterating words to mend it with). Albeit with a fair number of 'extra effects', which may be overly contrived for Verdurian poetic tastes!

sasasha wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 8:09 amI think it is pretty bad alliterative verse according to the rules on the Verdurian poetics page, and I don't think it entirely counts as sulirulî either(?), and in trying to get it to alliterate I mashed up the meaning (I ended up using "he maintained the glue" for "he kept his head"...)... but it's an attempt, anyway.

it sounds like a nice read -- if the glue goes, there's trouble, after all.

This is really ambitious, and you're doing great. Just looking at the grammar--

sasasha wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 8:09 am Kiel iskrične, so ktuvóc! Ktuďece kiel zet atikne,
com šualán ke scesce šadom, com šobostán ke leče kreba.
Cleir Lerimánio curce so ans glavei.
Proklec, badaec, so dësul vulne
ilun crusan, ilet dširen, ab undašin oliorin lië.
Ac com ctel ke cure šual, curce cruyece;
com nabron ke šri oraži er zëem
lebeřandre so glitoš. Brugivne so glavam
cel uemán soei ďëfkui, urë fue ďonde er šušde.[/code]

iskrične > iskridne
proklec, badaec > še proklir, badair
cel > im

Last sulirul: better adike šušde er šenne

Some of the alliteration doesn't work, but it'd take a long time to fix. I'd change "com šobostán" to just "com zëin", letting šualán/leče do the alliterative work.

That second line is a little long for the verse form. A Verdurian would probably turn it into two lines, inserting adjectives, something like

com šualán guleren / com zëin řopeilán
kaë frisu tayem / ke eseyü imutoran

"like an angry horse, like an agitated sea / which shakes the hero who tries to tame (them)"

I actually made an alliteration dictionary, but that was before the Great Relexification, so it's useless now.

zompist wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 5:00 pm This is really ambitious, and you're doing great.

Thank you! To be fair, it's a really well crafted little poem to translate!

Just looking at the grammar--
iskrične > iskridne
proklec, badaec > še proklir, badair
cel > im

Last sulirul: better adike šušde er šenne

Ah yes, thank you! Although, for the last sulirul, the alliteration was relying on ďonde. Would it work as 'adike ďonde fue er šušde'?

com šualán guleren / com zëin řopeilán
kaë frisu tayem / ke eseyü imutoran

"like an angry horse, like an agitated sea / which shakes the hero who tries to tame (them)"

Love that! Do I take it from these examples that it's not actually the first stress of the second sulirul that governs the alliteration for the whole line? (The poetics page suggests that it is.) Also, the Verdurian>English dictionary lists friser as intransitive (vi Ag) only, whilst scescan can be transitive.

If it is the first stress of the second sulirul that must alliterate, and the dictionary is right about friser, then how about:

com guleren šualán, / com řopeilán zëin,
kaë scescu tayem / ke imutoran eseyü

I actually made an alliteration dictionary, but that was before the Great Relexification, so it's useless now.

That must have taken quite some time! Did you list all the forms which lead to a shift in stress, of all of the words? I was thinking that you could probably write a programme to do it... but that might take longer than doing it.

Here's a corrected verse, and I've underlines the stresses and bolded out the alliteration to show that (I think) it now all works, taking the idea - maybe too freely - that clusters need not match. In the sulirulî which could have three stresses, I've chosen two as the 'most stressed' simply based on what seems to flow off the tongue. (I remember there being a bit of freedom in Old English alliterative verse wrt to this, for what it's worth.)

Kiel iskridne, so ktuvóc! / Ktuďece kiel zet atikne,
com guleren šualán, / com řopeilán zëin,
kaë scescu tayem / ke imutoran eseyü
Cleir Lerimánio / curce so ans glavei.
Še proklir, badair, / so dësul vulne
ilun crusan, ilet dširen, / ab undašin oliorin lië.
Ac com ctel ke cure šual, / curce cruyece;
com nabron ke šri / oraži er zëem
lebeřandre so grom. / Brugivne so glavam
im uemán soei ďëfkui, / adike ďonde fue er šušde.

Does this seem valid to you, or have I misunderstood some details? My main question now is, to what extent to Verdurian poets seek/avoid 'extra effects' (such as all of the extra <k>s hanging around in the first line, the fact that line 4 nearly works with <l> as well as <c>, all the <l>s in line 6 and all the <c>s in line 7)? Again, in Old English verse these would be seen as intentional acoustic effects, and there can be interesting patterns such as the non-alliterating stress of one line alliterating with the alliterating stresses in the next, etc, to play with too.

Final question - as you probably know, in Germanic alliterative verse it's the beginning of words, not the stressed syllables, that get to alliterate. This means that there's less ambiguity there with a statement like "consonant clusters don't have to match exactly, though it's a bonus if they do." That's because there's only one direction they are being analysed in - from the front. So in Germanic verse, gl- and gr- alliterate, but dr- and gr- don't (strictly speaking). With the Verdurians concentrating on the stressed vowel, it makes me wonder either both of the above alliterate, or just the second example? It's easier to write Verdurian verse if they're both legal... But then what about line 7, where I've tried to match ctel with curce? In Germanic this would be fine, assuming both words were phonotactically legal anyway, because both consonants are at the word-edge; but is it in Verdurian, where only one of them is right before the stressed vowel?

keenir wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 3:48 pm

sasasha wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 8:09 amI think it is pretty bad alliterative verse according to the rules on the Verdurian poetics page, and I don't think it entirely counts as sulirulî either(?), and in trying to get it to alliterate I mashed up the meaning (I ended up using "he maintained the glue" for "he kept his head"...)... but it's an attempt, anyway.

it sounds like a nice read -- if the glue goes, there's trouble, after all.

Thank you! Indeed, as all primary school teachers know, gotta refresh that glue.

zompist wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 5:00 pmI actually made an alliteration dictionary, but that was before the Great Relexification, so it's useless now.

it can still be used for references and examples, yes?

sasasha wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 9:25 am Ah yes, thank you! Although, for the last sulirul, the alliteration was relying on ďonde. Would it work as 'adike ďonde fue er šušde'?

Sure.

Do I take it from these examples that it's not actually the first stress of the second sulirul that governs the alliteration for the whole line? (The poetics page suggests that it is.)

To be honest I forgot about that rule. I'll just say that it's not ironclad. But your solution (moving the word) is better.

I actually made an alliteration dictionary, but that was before the Great Relexification, so it's useless now.

That must have taken quite some time! Did you list all the forms which lead to a shift in stress, of all of the words? I was thinking that you could probably write a programme to do it... but that might take longer than doing it.

A program would be the way to go! Maybe later...

Your corrected version looks good.

My main question now is, to what extent to Verdurian poets seek/avoid 'extra effects' (such as all of the extra <k>s hanging around in the first line, the fact that line 4 nearly works with <l> as well as <c>, all the <l>s in line 6 and all the <c>s in line 7)? Again, in Old English verse these would be seen as intentional acoustic effects, and there can be interesting patterns such as the non-alliterating stress of one line alliterating with the alliterating stresses in the next, etc, to play with too.

These are all fine. (Poets in many languages do the same...)

Final question - as you probably know, in Germanic alliterative verse it's the beginning of words, not the stressed syllables, that get to alliterate. This means that there's less ambiguity there with a statement like "consonant clusters don't have to match exactly, though it's a bonus if they do." That's because there's only one direction they are being analysed in - from the front. So in Germanic verse, gl- and gr- alliterate, but dr- and gr- don't (strictly speaking). With the Verdurians concentrating on the stressed vowel, it makes me wonder either both of the above alliterate, or just the second example? It's easier to write Verdurian verse if they're both legal... But then what about line 7, where I've tried to match ctel with curce? In Germanic this would be fine, assuming both words were phonotactically legal anyway, because both consonants are at the word-edge; but is it in Verdurian, where only one of them is right before the stressed vowel?

This should match Verdurian phonotactics. ct can begin a syllable, so në-cto could alliterate with ctel or cel. But (say) sč is not, so isčešen can't alliterate with sen.

Alliterating gl- and gr- is fine. To my ear dr- / gr- is OK but less great— definitely within the allowable leeway. But (say) ctel / tel) is fine— I guess the stops are stronger for me.

keenir wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 12:02 pm

zompist wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 5:00 pmI actually made an alliteration dictionary, but that was before the Great Relexification, so it's useless now.

it can still be used for references and examples, yes?

Not really, since so many words changed. Like that other database, my brain, it would give the superseded word too often.

zompist wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 4:12 pm To be honest I forgot about that rule. I'll just say that it's not ironclad. But your solution (moving the word) is better.

Yeah, tbf I would probably enjoy the freedom to occasionally break that rule, so nice that it's not ironclad.

These are all fine. (Poets in many languages do the same...)

Great. I think I was reacting to something in the poetics page about [paraphrasing] Verdurians not finding highly contrived metrical effects graceful. I imagine this would change with fashions though.

This should match Verdurian phonotactics. [...] I guess the stops are stronger for me.

That makes sense. I guess it's down to the poet's ear in the end.

Incidentally, I think the kes in my original line 2 needed to be kio, in retrospect.

Do Verdurian poets allow elision? E.g. verb forms in -e followed by er could optionally elide (adike ďonde fu'er šušde). Might help keep lines shorter.

And, is there any rule as to how long lines can be?

Again, thinking of Old English verse, you sometimes get extrametrical lines just cropping up for the hell of it, cos they sound good there for some reason.

sasasha wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 4:36 pm I think I was reacting to something in the poetics page about [paraphrasing] Verdurians not finding highly contrived metrical effects graceful.

I'd probably state that more forgivingly today. Verdurians do say that eyurcrivát should be normal speech elevated, not distorted to fit the poetic form. But this is like, say, a writing manual telling us not to over-use adjectives. Aesthetic standards differ, what the poet can get away with is strongly conditioned by what everyone else does, and there's always some clever person (or a particular context) who succeeds by violating all the rules.

Do Verdurian poets allow elision? E.g. verb forms in -e followed by er could optionally elide (adike ďonde fu'er šušde). Might help keep lines shorter.

And, is there any rule as to how long lines can be?

The answer to both is, I'm afraid, "it depends."

The primary consideration is whether the poem is intended to be set to music. Since there is no strict syllable count, the poor musician will have to deal with extra syllables here and there. But they'll be far happier if lines are kept to about the same length. There are all sorts of tricks you can use (you may recall I suggested a few of them for the Lacaturian song)-- elision, leaving out a pronoun or an article, drawing out a diphthong as two vowels, etc.

But if you're just writing to be read, you don't need to worry so much.

Again, thinking of Old English verse, you sometimes get extrametrical lines just cropping up for the hell of it, cos they sound good there for some reason.

You can do that in Verdurian (cf. the tombo and mancu in the poetics page). Ideally it's done for a reason-- as an aside, or to jar the reader a little.

Thank you for reminding me - I do recall now you gave some pointers on this via email, and I'd forgotten the tombo. (I wonder if they might want a term for sulirulî with three (or more) stresses rather than two (but where you can safely ignore some of them)...?)

I'm getting kind of addicted to doing these. They're good practice.
The Council of Stars, at the dawn of all:
bright was its glory, like a brotherhood of suns!
No shadow, no dark, only a sea of light.
Ecaîas the Bright was their mighty head.
Not even the stars could look full on his face:
who could be stronger? Eīnatu came next,
the Master of Arms; then Yeâ the kind,
whose Horn will ring when all things end.
Iáinos Unbegotten reigned over them,
his dream and will were joyfully theirs.
Eīledan formed them, at the dawn of all;
in their hearts burned the fire of Ulōne.

The Count of Years: 1


**

I also chucked a few aspect markers (and a ya just meaning 'indeed' after aďoraži - that ok?) into the previous one and played around with it a bit more, going back to šobostán, all mostly because the rhythm felt better (though I'm worried 'an unpeaceful brine' might suggest malevolent jars of pickles), and changed the first conceit so the sea and the horse now 'overturn' the hero. I also tried adding tu (conceptually in the accusative) in 'curce tu cruyece', because I think 'curec' requires an object. I know 'tu' should precede the verb, but won't it look very much like a nominative?; also poetically I wanted it between the two words if possible. Not sure. Anyway, I think the whole is slightly improved and I shall probably stop tweaking it now, though do say if I'm wrong.

zompist wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 11:50 pm

sasasha wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 4:36 pm I think I was reacting to something in the poetics page about [paraphrasing] Verdurians not finding highly contrived metrical effects graceful.

I'd probably state that more forgivingly today. Verdurians do say that eyurcrivát should be normal speech elevated, not distorted to fit the poetic form. But this is like, say, a writing manual telling us not to over-use adjectives. Aesthetic standards differ, what the poet can get away with is strongly conditioned by what everyone else does, and there's always some clever person (or a particular context) who succeeds by violating all the rules.

Also a technical tour de force may be considered admirable even if the result is not otherwise very aesthetical pleasing or natural. The prose in Perec's La Disparition is inevitably awkward and choppy, but that doesn't make the work any less impressive.